Not-so-merry Fitzmas

The New Republic on the morning after:

Well, that was much ado about nothing. I don't really think the indictment of the man who served as the Vice President's Chief of Staff--and whose role in the administration was in fact much larger than that--is no big deal. It is. But the way Democrats were talking about this case leading up to the indictment, this has to come as a letdown. After all, liberals believed that Patrick Fitzgerald was going to cripple the Bush administration and reveal the lies and deceptions behind the Iraq war. There was speculation that Fitzgerald would shine a bright, unflattering light onto the inner workings of the White House Iraq Group. There was talk that he was going to name a "Constitutional officer"--namely Cheney--as an unindicted co-conspirator. And there were rumors that he was seeking to empanel a second grand jury to investigate who ginned up the fake "Niger documents."

Maybe Fitzgerald just has a very impressive poker face, but it sure seemed from his press conference that none of those things is now going to happen.

Although the Libby indictments are a stain on the White House, the Left was positively giddy about the thought of Karl Rove in handcuffs. If Libby pleads out, it will be long-forgotten among most Americans (who don’t follow the story as compulsively as we do) by Christmas. (Hat tip: Polipundit)

More – The Washington Post gets it mostly right:

The special counsel was principally investigating whether any official violated a law that makes it a crime to knowingly disclose the identity of an undercover agent. The public record offers no indication that Mr. Libby or any other official deliberately exposed Ms. Plame to punish her husband, former ambassador Joseph C. Wilson IV. Rather, Mr. Libby and other officials, including Karl Rove, the White House deputy chief of staff, apparently were seeking to combat the sensational allegations of a critic. They may have believed that Ms. Plame's involvement was an important part of their story of why Mr. Wilson was sent to investigate claims that Iraq sought uranium ore from Niger, and why his subsequent -- and mostly erroneous -- allegations that the administration twisted that small part of the case against Saddam Hussein should not be credited. To criminalize such discussions between officials and reporters would run counter to the public interest.

While the NY Times, well, let’s just say that they never fail to play to form.

Bonus – From Gay Patriot: “Libby indicted for doing what Wilson did, but under oath” – “Libby has now been accused of doing exactly what Joe Wilson has been doing since that “Administration critic” wrote the New York Times op-ed at issue in this whole mess. He deceived people. With one big difference. Libby lied under oath and Wilson did so in the pages of newspapers, in the pages of his book, on the lecture circuit and on a variety of talk shows.”

Finally - Welcome readers of Keith Milby’s blog!